MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2584189308 · doi:10.1177/0021886316682591

A Way Forward

2016· article· en· W2584189308 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Applied Behavioral Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEthics in Business and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersBoston College
KeywordsLanguage changePublic relationsEthical leadershipOrganizational commitmentBusinessSet (abstract data type)PerceptionUnit (ring theory)Strategic business unitBusiness administrationManagementPolitical scienceMarketingPsychologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Corruption recovery is a critical but understudied organizational change. We gained unique access to a company that experienced multiple corruption incidents in the months prior to our survey rollout that garnered 2,300+ respondents (71%) across 19 business units. We explored how employee perceptions of leaders’ enactment of a core set of values and of CEO and business unit leaders’ ethical leadership were associated with organizational commitment as these leaders implemented change following corruption. Results indicated that ethical leadership and values enactment were associated with increased organizational commitment. Group-level membership in units implicated in corruption was associated with reduced commitment while membership in business units with increased customer contact was associated with increased commitment. Shared employee perspectives of the ethical leadership of business unit leaders, but not the CEO, were also associated with higher commitment. We also discuss future research, limitations, and implications for management.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.243
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it